Three of the most previously-prosperous, economically stable nations in South America, Argentina, Brazil and Venezuela, are all in deep crisis and so are their current or former leftist leaders.

Argentina's former president far leftist Kirschner, has been indicted for financial crimes in a conspiracy to sell off the nation's money supply to foreigners at below-market prices for political reasons:

Meanwhile Venezuela, hit by years of mismanagement by two socialist presidents who failed to build a strong, well-diversified economy (as advised by economists) despite hundreds of billions of dollars of annual income from oil, is having a complete economic collapse. Venezuela's economy has been ruined by too many government give-aways (failed "social programs"= political bribery), too little foreign investment and too much waste/corruption. The current president Maduro is beleaguered by the realities of his own failures to make changes to how the nation's economy functions at the most fundamental level in order to protect it against the collapse of global oil prices which is in it's fourth year. He is also facing no-confidence protests and rioting across the nation. Also, regional law enforcement organizations have lodged formal accusations of Maduro government collaboration with international drug cartels, aggravated by the recent arrest of his own adopted son on charges of trying to smuggle massive amounts of cocaine.

And as if the approaching 2016 Olympics being beset by one of the worst viral infections in the history of the region (Zika virus) is not enough, Brazil's own far left president Rousseff is on track to be impeached for obstructing a corruption investigation into her own suspected financial dealings while in office.

All of the leftist leaders have exactly the same excuse - a vast right-wing conspiracy. That may be Hill-O-Lies Clinton's genuine legacy in regard to foreign policy - her own attempt to avoid blaming her husband's bad behavior has been picked-up and used by every leftist leader who gets caught doing bad things. It's always some conspiracy of evil political adversaries, never anything that they have actually done that is the reason for their troubles.

Hill-O-Lies is the enabler to the world's leftists, providing transparently false excuses for every bad actor on the leftist stage.

hah hah well, there is some truth to that. What's sort of funny is that a few years ago, Infowars would have been the source which undercut someone's credibility.

I try to review articles on a case-by-case basis before I include them in posts. To be fair, the NY Times is one of those publications that is probably 90% anti-conservative propaganda but occasionally they print a "random act of journalism" (to quote Limbaugh) that is actually factual and reasonably accurate. So in this case. I found several sources to choose from for the source material for the topic. Of those, the Times article had better content.

The NYT is similar to Time magazine and other propaganda outlets for Marxists and their enablers, one must pick and choose.

Infowars is a site that has become more and more a source for legitimate news as the Eightball Obama administration has gone further and further into infamy and extreme ideology.

Hunter Thompson said, "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro". heh Alex Jones must have been a fan of Thompson.

What once seemed like "outrageous and unthinkable" is now commonplace in the world of public events and Infowars is well-suited to that sort of coverage. For instance, only a few years ago, anyone who proposed that the president of the United States would embrace a policy of holding back billions of dollars in federal funding from states which refused to allow adult males into restrooms with minor females, would have been labeled a paranoid anti-government "kook".

hah hah well, there is some truth to that. What's sort of funny is that a few years ago, Infowars would have been the source which undercut someone's credibility.

I try to review articles on a case-by-case basis before I include them in posts. To be fair, the NY Times is one of those publications that is probably 90% anti-conservative propaganda but occasionally they print a "random act of journalism" (to quote Limbaugh) that is actually factual and reasonably accurate. So in this case. I found several sources to choose from for the source material for the topic. Of those, the Times article had better content.

The NYT is similar to Time magazine and other propaganda outlets for Marxists and their enablers, one must pick and choose.

Infowars is a site that has become more and more a source for legitimate news as the Eightball Obama administration has gone further and further into infamy and extreme ideology.

Hunter Thompson said, "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro". heh Alex Jones must have been a fan of Thompson.

What once seemed like "outrageous and unthinkable" is now commonplace in the world of public events and Infowars is well-suited to that sort of coverage. For instance, only a few years ago, anyone who proposed that the president of the United States would embrace a policy of holding back billions of dollars in federal funding from states which refused to allow adult males into restrooms with minor females, would have been labeled a paranoid anti-government "kook".

And still you fail to grasp my point.The left are the only ones carrying the NY Slimes narrative of corruption being the reason for communist governments collapsing. Yes, use your theme and do a search, I'd be willing to bet all you find are leftist rags repeating this failed narrative.Truth is, ALL Commie govts thrive through corruption, it's the root of despotism.How is it you can't see the left is selling talking points first, so LIV will buy the bull shit line that Communism isn't to blame for these govts collapsing, but that individual leaders are responsible for it's failure.

And still you fail to grasp my point.The left are the only ones carrying the NY Slimes narrative of corruption being the reason for communist governments collapsing. Yes, use your theme and do a search, I'd be willing to bet all you find are leftist rags repeating this failed narrative.Truth is, ALL Commie govts thrive through corruption, it's the root of despotism.How is it you can't see the left is selling talking points first, so LIV will buy the bull shit line that Communism isn't to blame for these govts collapsing, but that individual leaders are responsible for it's failure.

All due respect, ( and that is great) I disagree. The article admits that there is corruption, which is the root cause of the current political crisis. That is enough. People are smart. If they have enough information they will figure out the rest ( such as that radical socialism, including communism is all sophistic, hyper-intellectual BS).

Most conservatives already understand that radical, revolutionary socialism is a short rail to catastrophe. Those who can be convinced to question the current leftist narrative that "radical revolutionary socialism has just not been done well enough by people who are smart enough" will see the results of applied socialist principles and QED, connect it to the reality that the narrative is false.

Even though the U.S. population elected the Eightball Obama twice (at least if we can accept that the election system is not already hopelessly compromised, which I am not) I think there is a lot of evidence that on the whole the average non-leftist is fairly bright.

One of the biggest problems in our current situation is that the information that people access is either false, misleading or incomplete because of the socialist (mis) education system.

Sure we don't back off denigrating radical socialism (especially communism, which is radical revolutionary Statist socialism forced on a population at the point of a gun) but we also try to educate people by allowing people like the NY Times to make admissions like these (even though they hope that people will buy into their narrative) about how obscenely corrupt leftists are.

Concerning the other criticisms of your post, (my "lack of critical thinking skills, etc.) I find that I must post either a great deal or nothing at all. I elect the latter.

All due respect, ( and that is great) I disagree. The article admits that there is corruption, which is the root cause of the current political crisis. That is enough. People are smart. If they have enough information they will figure out the rest ( such as that radical socialism, including communism is all sophistic, hyper-intellectual BS).

Most conservatives already understand that radical, revolutionary socialism is a short rail to catastrophe. Those who can be convinced to question the current leftist narrative that "radical revolutionary socialism has just not been done well enough by people who are smart enough" will see the results of applied socialist principles and QED, connect it to the reality that the narrative is false.

Even though the U.S. population elected the Eightball Obama twice (at least if we can accept that the election system is not already hopelessly compromised, which I am not) I think there is a lot of evidence that on the whole the average non-leftist is fairly bright.

One of the biggest problems in our current situation is that the information that people access is either false, misleading or incomplete because of the socialist (mis) education system.

Sure we don't back off denigrating radical socialism (especially communism, which is radical revolutionary Statist socialism forced on a population at the point of a gun) but we also try to educate people by allowing people like the NY Times to make admissions like these (even though they hope that people will buy into their narrative) about how obscenely corrupt leftists are.

Concerning the other criticisms of your post, (my "lack of critical thinking skills, etc.) I find that I must post either a great deal or nothing at all. I elect the latter.

hah hah Perhaps I am obtuse, but if so, it is not revealed by my post. Communism is an ambiguous term both historically and within the context of the plethora interpretations of the "post-modern" popular lexicon (the mass media alters the meaning of terms capriciously). What does communism mean to you !?! And why does its deletion from the article make the entire substance irrelevant or inaccurate?

Of course, you are free to insult me further sieur, but that tends to end discussions, so I generally avoid insulting friends and allies since I am generally interested in their thoughts, feelings and opinions.

hah hah Perhaps I am obtuse, but if so, it is not revealed by my post. Communism is an ambiguous term both historically and within the context of the plethora interpretations of the "post-modern" popular lexicon (the mass media alters the meaning of terms capriciously). What does communism mean to you !?! And why does its deletion from the article make the entire substance irrelevant or inaccurate?

Of course, you are free to insult me further sieur, but that tends to end discussions, so I generally avoid insulting friends and allies since I am generally interested in their thoughts, feelings and opinions.

Yes, that statement confirmed my earlier suspicions that you're obtuse, but then you proceed to obfuscate with some strawman over individual interpretation of Marxism, which makes one question your affinity for leftist drivel.

Again, go through that BS you posted and show me one reference to the left.I bet you don't even see the parallel here with our own leftist govt. Yeah, that's one of the issues NY Slimes is working hard in it's avoidance to connecting the dots of communism and Dim party policy.

Yes, that statement confirmed my earlier suspicions that you're obtuse, but then you proceed to obfuscate with some strawman over individual interpretation of Marxism, which makes one question your affinity for leftist drivel.

Again, go through that BS you posted and show me one reference to the left.I bet you don't even see the parallel here with our own leftist govt. Yeah, that's one of the issues NY Slimes is working hard in it's avoidance to connecting the dots of communism and Dim party policy.

It just seems to me that to throw out the entire article about corruption of leftists, simply because they are not mentioned as such, is forsaking the good in pursuit of the perfect.

That this is being reported at all shows how dramatically desperate the far left is becoming - because things are so bad and getting worse, that they HAVE to report it. That is encouraging to me and IMO worth sharing.

You are certainly entitled to your opinions on my intellect, character or allegiance, but you can't reasonably think that I will agree.

It just seems to me that to throw out the entire article about corruption of leftists, simply because they are not mentioned as such, is forsaking the good in pursuit of the perfect.

That this is being reported at all shows how dramatically desperate the far left is becoming - because things are so bad and getting worse, that they HAVE to report it. That is encouraging to me and IMO worth sharing.

You are certainly entitled to your opinions on my intellect, character or allegiance, but you can't reasonably think that I will agree.

No, the fact that they create a bull shit narrative to explain away failed Marxism instead of telling the truth, instead of ignoring the story, it should have set off alarms in your head.Most times the left simply buries these stories, but in this case, the Slimes wanted to be the first to tell the lefts version of how they perceive what is taking place, or rather how they want you to view what has happened, and obviously it worked.You didn't even question what they put forward...

This is a good time to question your critical thinking skills, or maybe just stop and question everything you read.It's the very thing that separates Libs from Cons.They "Feel" we think....